My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Building Code Board of Appeals Minutes 2000
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
BUILDING CODE BOARD OF APPEALS
>
2000-2019 Building Code Board of Appeals Agendas and Packets
>
2000 Building Code Board of Appeals Agendas and Packets
>
Building Code Board of Appeals Minutes 2000
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/10/2021 2:01:12 PM
Creation date
10/4/2018 10:28:18 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
Supplemental fields
Test
BCBOAMIN 2000
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
10
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
emphasize that their decision to do so had nothing to do with the fine work that this Board did in <br /> bringing forward the International Plumbing Code. <br /> I think the board did a very good IPC ordinance and presentation, with an excellent record <br /> showing how and why it made changes to make sure that its version of the plumbing code was at <br /> least as strict as the uniform code. <br /> The draft ordinance which I prepared simply refers to the 1997 Uniform Plumbing Code with the <br /> appendices adopted by the State Board. I do need your help and assistance in determining <br /> whether there are other amendments that the State Board has approved that we should mclude, or <br /> if there are any amendments which the City would want to include. <br /> Ray Schlott—Are the people who testified to this Board against the IPC they same people named <br /> in the lawsuit. <br /> Sam Light—I am not sure. <br /> Ray Schlott—The"harm"would seem to be quite vague. <br /> Sam Light—It is nothing more than an allegation. <br /> Greg Culhson—We only adopted portions of the IPC that ran directly in line with the UPC. <br /> Greg Cullison—The speakers at our hearings were picking the pieces out of the code which they <br /> were opposed to. Those were things we had opted not to include. <br /> Sam Light—That is why I think that part of this lawsuit is getting towards bigger issues. I think <br /> we did an excellent job of amending our code to make it at least as restrictive as the Uniform <br /> Code. What they are looking for some victory,no matter what form it comes in,that says that <br /> the Uniform Plumbing Code is better than the IPC Something that they can use as leverage. <br /> That is what I see as one of the motivating factors behind this lawsuit. If you win this sort of <br /> lawsuit agamst a statutory municipality then you have a judgement which you can use at the next <br /> hearing of a home rule City <br /> Thomas Talboom—This will not come down as a judgement,will it? <br /> Sam Light—We have done nothing more than receive a lawsuit by the Pipe Trades Association <br /> and two persons who allege that the international plumbing code is a scam code. If we repeal <br /> that code,the suit will likely be moot and dismissed. <br /> Greg Culhson—They can still use that,they can say we made this jurisdiction back down. That <br /> is almost is good as going to court and going through the whole process. The sad thing is that we <br /> amended all the things out of the code that they objected to I wish we had deep pockets because <br /> 2 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.